News & Analysis as of

Affirmative Defenses Supreme Court of the United States

Bass, Berry & Sims PLC

Gender-Affirming Care Remains a Hot Topic in 2024

Bass, Berry & Sims PLC on

Our April 9 blog post highlighted several issues to watch during 2024, one of which was gender-affirming care considerations. Just over a month later, there have now been three key developments with respect to that issue:...more

Proskauer Rose LLP

Broadway Ruling Puts Discrimination Claims In The Limelight

Proskauer Rose LLP on

Does the First Amendment right to free speech permit an employer to hire or fire an employee based on race? On its face, the proposition may seem absurd, especially as we approach the 60th anniversary of the Civil Rights Act...more

ArentFox Schiff

Will Environmental Justice Programs Be Affected by SCOTUS’s Affirmative Action Decisions?

ArentFox Schiff on

In the United States, environmental and public health measures often correlate to variables like education, income, and a community’s racial makeup. In the five decades since Congress began to create comprehensive...more

Snell & Wilmer

Supreme Court Clarifies That Medical Providers Cannot Be Convicted Of Illegal Drug Distribution If Prosecutors Do Not Prove the...

Snell & Wilmer on

In Justice Breyer’s final opinion from the bench in a 9-0 decision, the United States Supreme Court clarified that for a physician to be criminally convicted of distributing a controlled substance, the Department of Justice...more

Dorsey & Whitney LLP

The Supreme Court - January 11, 2021

Dorsey & Whitney LLP on

Minerva Surgical, Inc. v. Hologic, Inc., No. 20-440: Whether a defendant in a patent infringement action who assigned the patent, or is in privity with an assignor of the patent, may have a defense of invalidity heard on the...more

McGlinchey Stafford

Florida Real Property & Business Litigation Report, Volume 13, Issue 26

McGlinchey Stafford on

Liu v. Securities And Exchange Commission, Case No. 18–1501 (2020). Equitable relief, including disgorgement, is permissible under the Securities Act of 1933, 15 U. S. C. §77a et seq., so long as it does not exceed a...more

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C.

MarkIt to Market® - January 2020: "Soft" IP Takes Center Stage at the Supreme Court

The “soft” IP world is looking forward to rulings in six trademark and copyright cases this term, far more than in recent years, and all of which address points of uncertainty that will impact trademark and copyright...more

Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP

2019-20 Supreme Court Update

The U.S. Supreme Court’s 2019-20 term is receiving substantial attention for cases involving signature initiatives of President Donald Trump’s administration. But the Court also maintains an extensive docket directly relevant...more

Payne & Fears

Key California Employment Law Cases: June 2019

Payne & Fears on

This month's key California employment law cases involve EEOC charges, disability discrimination, and meal breaks....more

Pullman & Comley - Labor, Employment and...

Employers: Don't Overlook Your Title VII Defenses!

Last month the U.S. Supreme Court simultaneously resolved a long-running dispute about procedure under Title VII and sent a message to employers that it is important to pay attention and act promptly when faced with a Title...more

Cranfill Sumner LLP

Invalidating Long-Standing Fourth Circuit Precedent, U.S. Supreme Court Holds that Title VII’s Charge Filing Requirement is...

Cranfill Sumner LLP on

Before initiating a lawsuit under Title VII, a complainant must first file a charge of discrimination with the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) within 180 days of the alleged act of discrimination....more

Laner Muchin, Ltd.

Title VII Claims Not Raised In EEOC Charge Must Be Timely Challenged

Laner Muchin, Ltd. on

On June 3, 2019, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously ruled in Fort Bend County v. Davis that Title VII’s administrative exhaustion requirement is a claims-processing requirement, not a jurisdictional requirement, which means...more

Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, LLP

Supreme Court: Title VII’s Requirements Not Jurisdictional

In a unanimous decision, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that Title VII’s charge-filing precondition to suit is not a jurisdictional requirement and is instead a procedural prescription that is subject to forfeiture, refusing to...more

Jones Day

SCOTUS: Filing Requirement is Not Jurisdictional

Jones Day on

The Situation: The U.S. Supreme Court unanimously held that filing a charge of discrimination with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") is not a jurisdictional prerequisite to bringing a Title VII lawsuit. The...more

Orrick - Employment Law and Litigation

Use It or Lose It: SCOTUS holds that EEOC Charge-Filing Requirement Is Forfeited If Not Timely Asserted

On June 3, 2019, the United States Supreme Court issued its decision in Fort Bend County, Texas v. Davis, resolving a circuit split regarding whether Title VII’s charge-filing requirement with the Equal Employment Opportunity...more

Bracewell LLP

Timely Use It, or Lose It: Recent Supreme Court Case Provides Reminders for Employers, but Employees Still Need to File a Charge...

Bracewell LLP on

In Fort Bend County, Texas v. Davis (U.S. June 3, 2019), the U.S. Supreme Court (Court) held that the charge-filing requirement under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII) is not jurisdictional. The case...more

Spilman Thomas & Battle, PLLC

Waiver Warning: SCOTUS Determines Title VII Failure to Exhaust Defense Can be Waived

A recent decision from the Supreme Court of the United States - Fort Bend County v. Davis - has sparked conversations about whether a current or former employee must file a complaint with the EEOC before suing an employer for...more

Spilman Thomas & Battle, PLLC

SuperVision - Labor and Employment Law Insights: Issue 2, 2019

The Editor's Note - ...In this edition of SuperVision, Carrie Grundmann discusses EEO1 requirements, Mitch Rhein discusses the DOL's latest on the virtual marketplace, and Chelsea Thompson explains a recent United States...more

Parker Poe Adams & Bernstein LLP

U.S. Supreme Court Says Plaintiff Can Sue For Discrimination Without Filing EEOC Charge

On June 3, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously resolved a split among federal appellate courts dealing with the question of whether Title VII’s requirement that plaintiffs file an administrative charge with the Equal...more

PilieroMazza PLLC

Use It Or Lose It: U.S. Supreme Court Holds Employers Who Wait Too Long to Raise EEOC Claim Objection to Title VII Discrimination...

PilieroMazza PLLC on

Recently, in Fort Bend County, Texas v. Davis, the U.S. Supreme Court was faced with a jurisdictional question: If a plaintiff fails to exhaust her remedies by first filing an Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”)...more

Womble Bond Dickinson

Raise Title VII Defense Early On or Risk Waiver, Supreme Court Rules

Womble Bond Dickinson on

The U.S. Supreme Court recently clarified that the requirement that a plaintiff exhaust his/her administrative remedies before filing a discrimination claim under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act is a mandatory...more

Mintz - Employment Viewpoints

The Bubbler - June 2019

Welcome to June! As we head into the summer, the employment law world continues to heat up! We have rounded up the most recent developments impacting employers for your summer reading pleasure here....more

Seyfarth Shaw LLP

Use It or Lose It: Supreme Court Rules that Failure to Exhaust Defense Must be Prompt

Seyfarth Shaw LLP on

Seyfarth Synopsis: New decision from the Supreme Court ruled that Title VII’s requirement that plaintiffs file with the EEOC or other state agencies is a non-jurisdictional claim-processing rule, which means it can be...more

Kramer Levin Naftalis & Frankel LLP

Supreme Court Holds That in Title VII Suits, Employers Must Raise Failure to Exhaust Administrative Remedies in a Timely Manner or...

The Supreme Court held in Fort Bend County v. Davis that the charge-filing precondition to suit of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 is a mandatory claim-processing rule subject to waiver, not a jurisdictional bar to...more

Maynard Nexsen

Charge of Discrimination is Not Jurisdictional: U.S. Supreme Court Makes Dismissal of Discrimination Claims More Difficult for...

Maynard Nexsen on

On June 3, 2019, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously ruled that the requirement under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act for employees to file an administrative charge of discrimination with the Equal Employment Opportunity...more

65 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 3

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide